Aluckyguess wrote:
If so should we limit the growth of the human population to save the
planet also?


In the long term this is an essential part of the solution because
we have many effects on the earth other than greenhouse gasses, many
resources that we need are running out and many pollutants that we
make, including greenhouse gasses, are harming the environment. You
can reduce the rate of using up resources and generating pollutants
per head but unless you do something about the number of heads too
you are only delaying the date of collapse as you cannot reach
stability. Those who suggest that there is no need to limit human
population
(say because of technological advances) will find that it is limited
for them, or for their descedants, nontheless. It will be limted by
the Four Horsemen.

My chemistry is week. However, this "Nathan Fiala" is an economist
not a chemist or biologist. After all, Does any economist of this
world know what they are saying, let alone how this world operates?


You do have to wonder.

David

We can not damage the earth, we can only damage ourselves. The planet
will heal itself its just a matter of time.

Is producing pollution that affects other organisms and climate not harming
the earth? Is the human-caused extinction of species not harming the earth?

How long would you be prepared to wait for the eco-system to re-balance?
What do you think would be happening to humanity while you wait?

David